Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> clone 944094 -1
Bug #944094 [lintian] Please exclude .path & .service pairs from
package-supports-alternative-init-but-no-init.d-script
Bug 944094 cloned as bug 944145
> retitle -1 Please exclude .path/.timer & .service pairs from
>
Hi Richard,
> Thanks! That addresses the bit from the title, but I don't see any
> changes to also suppress systemd-service-file-missing-install-key in
> these cases, as requested by:
[…]
Please clone and retitle to match; multiple requests in the same
wishlist bug often lead to this in my
On 11/4/19 12:42 PM, Chris Lamb wrote:
> Bug #944094 in lintian reported by you has been fixed in the
> Git repository and is awaiting an upload. You can see the commit
> message below and you can check the diff of the fix at:
>
>
Processing control commands:
> reassign -1 libseccomp2 2.4.1-1
Bug #943913 [lintian] lintian: processing packages with many manpages is very
slow
Bug reassigned from package 'lintian' to 'libseccomp2'.
No longer marked as found in versions lintian/2.31.0.
Ignoring request to alter fixed versions
Control: reassign -1 libseccomp2 2.4.1-1
Control: forwarded -1 https://github.com/seccomp/libseccomp/issues/153
Control: retitle -1 libseccomp2: seccomp_rule_add is very slow
Control: affects -1 man-db lintian
On 2019-11-04 10:35 -0800, Felix Lechner wrote:
> Hi Sven,
>
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at
Processing control commands:
> tag -1 pending
Bug #944094 [lintian] Please exclude .path & .service pairs from
package-supports-alternative-init-but-no-init.d-script
Added tag(s) pending.
--
944094: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=944094
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact
Hi Sven,
On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 10:20 AM Sven Joachim wrote:
>
> It seems to me we are likely experiencing
> https://github.com/seccomp/libseccomp/issues/153.
Thanks for sharing! Perhaps that's why Lintian's test suite has been
running so slow.
Please feel free to reassign (or close) this bug
Your message dated Mon, 04 Nov 2019 18:19:35 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#943957: fixed in lintian 2.33.0
has caused the Debian Bug report #943957,
regarding lintian: missing-systemd-service-for-init.d-script should be a
warning, not just pedantic
to be marked as done.
This means
Accepted:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Format: 1.8
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2019 17:40:59 +
Source: lintian
Architecture: source
Version: 2.33.0
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: Debian Lintian Maintainers
Changed-By: Chris Lamb
Closes: 933304 943947 943957
lintian_2.33.0_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
lintian_2.33.0.dsc
lintian_2.33.0.tar.xz
lintian_2.33.0_amd64.buildinfo
Greetings,
Your Debian queue daemon (running on host usper.debian.org)
Your message dated Mon, 04 Nov 2019 18:19:35 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#943947: fixed in lintian 2.33.0
has caused the Debian Bug report #943947,
regarding lintian: outdated build-profile list - noguile is registered, isn't
it?
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim
On 2019-11-01 10:42 +0100, Sven Joachim wrote:
> Bringing man-db and libseccomp maintainers into the loop.
>
> On 2019-10-31 23:01 -0700, Felix Lechner wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 11:33 AM Sven Joachim wrote:
>>>
>>> Running lintian on packages with many manpages is painfully slow.
>>
>>
Your message dated Mon, 04 Nov 2019 18:19:35 +
with message-id
and subject line Bug#933304: fixed in lintian 2.33.0
has caused the Debian Bug report #933304,
regarding lintian: suggest switching from debian/compat to debhelper-compat
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the
Chris Lamb pushed new tag 2.33.0 at lintian / lintian
--
View it on GitLab: https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/tree/2.33.0
You're receiving this email because of your account on salsa.debian.org.
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> severity 944113 wishlist
Bug #944113 [lintian] please emit an error for python shebangs used in a package
Severity set to 'wishlist' from 'normal'
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
--
944113:
Hi Sebastian,
On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 2:24 AM Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
>
> | * Build-Depends-Package: #PACKAGE#
In addition to your new tag, we can probably also check for the
following conditions:
1. Prerequisite is not a development package (does not end with -dev)
2. Prerequisite is not
Package: lintian
Issue #943366 asks to split out the request to emit an error for python shebangs
used in a package into a separate bug report.
This should include usage of python in autopkg tests, and maybe rules files, if
it's detectable.
#943666 has the discussion about changing the
Hi Sebastian,
On Sun, Nov 3, 2019 at 8:36 AM Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
>
> No, I don't. But I am also not a fan of that tag.
FWIW, the tag description now points out that the placeholder
#PACKAGE# should not be used. Perhaps it deters some people.
Package: lintian
Version: 2.32.0
Severity: normal
I'm looking into preparing a GLib stable update with this changelog:
glib2.0 (2.58.3-2+deb10u2) UNRELEASED; urgency=medium
...
-- Simon McVittie Mon, 04 Nov 2019 09:01:56 +
glib2.0 (2.58.3-2+deb10u1) buster; urgency=medium
...
--
Package: lintian
Version: 2.32.0
Severity: normal
To fix #933109, lintian no longer emits
package-supports-alternative-init-but-no-init.d-script when there is a
.service and .timer pair.
I would like to see this extended to also include a .service and .path
pair. Just as with a .timer, if a
20 matches
Mail list logo
